in my webstats google images comes up as a different bot to the googlebot so i imagine therefore it would be possible to just exclude google images if you wanted as stated by someone else earlier. but the third page in the google images sequence (search page, search results then specific result) does actually show the image in the context of the page. I have been searching for images before and ended up reading the contents of a page. so i think it -is- a possible source for readers of your content. And from the sound of the it, it has the potential to bring considerable traffic from what some of the others were saying earlier in this thread. and probably if one thought about it strategically you could come up with ways to encourage these images viewers to convert to content readers. personally i've optimised all the images on my site in the hope that the google images bot will pick them up. filenames with keywords with words seperated by dashes. and ensuring that as many images have alt and link title attributes. i dunno if it works yet. those of you that are getting a lot of google images traffic - do you optimise your images in any way to get better rankings?
I have used the images to find parts for cars that are a little different, someone may list the part but not be exactly what I was looking for so the images come in very handy.
i beleive all the webmasters should have to choice TO LET or NOT TO LET google include the images to Google Images. Because for some webmasters it is usefull (converts to sales) but for others it is just stolen bandwidth. Of course, every good webmaster can deny Google access to images, but there should be an easyer way to accept / don't accept it. from my point of view, google images accesses bring more content stealing, than converting to buyers...
what happens to celebrity sites which uses images from all over the web. Aren't they subject to same ruling? just curious
it's not usually good traffic though. i've never actually visited the site i get from google images, unless it's part of a gallery
G images traffic is beneficial for some, but not for everyone and can actually be a nuisance to others. I have sites that fit into all 3 categories. And while it's true that the bot can be easily directed to avoid your image folder(s), I think the question (and basis behind the lawsuit) is why is it the webmaster's responsibility to do so? That's sort of like saying it's your own fault you were robbed because you didn't lock your second floor hallway window to let the thief know you didn't want your stuff taken... it's twisted thinking. And like a thief who steals and resells your stuff, G does benefit financially from reusing other's content so I can see a certain logic in placing the duty on G to request permission first instead of saying permission is implied since you didn't tell them not to in your robots file. Not trying to bash Google, I love G and the traffic it brings me, just trying to look at this objectively I can understand the ruling.
Please do not use the word porn anymore. Porn is not good, and porn affects young people. Ps: porn, porn, porn.
please don't talk like if you want me to post some pictures.. you think you saw it all, but you have no idea *pls pls pls ask again I'll post some pictures*
Ahem. htaccess your server to prevent hotlinking. That way you can let Google list your images, but not anyone else. Pretty easy, no?
If i had a porn website or a design templates website, it would be great that google images displays my thumbnails But i agree totally on the fact that google image search is just a bandwith spammer. porn porn porn porn porn
This is your motivation: Links from an Internet Search Engine - Full list - Google (Images) 205599 304089 - Google 14824 15163
I think google can come up with a mechanism to help the webmasters to get more quality traffic since there images are getting shown. I mean when you click on the thumbnail image, it should take you to the page on which the image is there.
did you check the bounce rates on those? - http://community.livejournal.com/ 1904588 oh my GOD!!! so many VISItORS!!! HOLY SHITT!!!!!! oh wait..only 600 actually ended up on my sites, because it was hotlinked thumbnails.